Talk:6th National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:6th National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dudley Miles (talk · contribs) 20:38, 2 March 2014 (UTC) I will take this one. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:38, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

• Comments (I have made a few minor edits myself).
• Lead
• (Explained) "The congress occurs once every five years." Is this correct? Thayer says that there has sometimes been 16 years between them.
  • It is officially held every fifth year, but wasn't during the Vietnam War. Since the 5th Congress all congresses have been held according to schedule (the 5th Congress was postponed a year because of factional infighting.) .. So its correct, since its as of the 5th Congress.
• Done "as well as amending party documents if needed." This sounds unclear. Perhaps something like "as well as updating party documents"?
• The 8th plenum and reforms
• Done It would be helpful to give the dates of the plenums.
• Done "forced the party" - sounds a curious wording. How about "instructed" rather than forced?
• Done (made it clearer who said it; Le Duc Tho) "Confusion within the party over operational responsibilities between the central party leadership, mass organizations and the state, and between higher and lower party echelons had developed into a serious problem.[3] A cynical collective mindset within the party had taken hold and manifested itself through corruption, inflexibility and dishonesty." This sounds POV as worded. I think you need to make clear that it is all Tho's view.
• Done "The party tried to reverse this decline by following three points". Does the party mean the plenun here? Perhaps "The plenum put forward three points to solve the problems alleged by Tho".
• Done (made it clear that the party elite believed their educational qualifications were outdated) "most party cadres had an education 20 to 30 years old" What does this mean? That most cadres had left school 20 or 30 years ago? That does not sound like a problem in itself. Perhaps just leave out and say it lacked young cadres.
• Done "The reforms initiated at the 8th plenum of the 5th Central Committee were continued at the 9th plenum,[5] which because of rampant inflation forced the central leadership to reintroduce rationing.[5] Because of the inflation increase caused by the 1985 reforms, the Council of Ministers in March 1985 legalized limited, small-scale, private enterprise in the handicraft and small industry sectors.[5]" This reads to me as confusing. How about something like "Economic reforms in 1985 led to rampant inflation, and the 9th plenum forced the central leadership to reintroduce rationing in order to reduce the hardships for the poor, while in March 1985 the Council of Ministers legalized limited, small-scale, private enterprise in the handicraft and small industry sectors."
• "they still sought the abolition of individual trade." This seems to contradict saying above that they legalised small scale private enterprise.
  • I can look into it, but I think the state still had monopoly on internal trade in the country; private companies had to trade through the state.. Or it was a Marxist pragmatism; in China, the CPC reached the conclusion that a private company with less than 5 employees could not exploit its workers' (or at least to the same degree as bigger ones).
• More to follow. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:38, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
• Preparations
• Done 6th National Congress - the dates would be helpful.
  • The date for the plenum? I'll find out . --TIAYN (talk) 11:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
• Done "party localities failing to prepare" - localities seems an odd word here.
• District and provincial congresses and conferences
• (Will look into) "a day-long conference discussing the Draft Political Report, which ended unenthusiastically." "ended unenthusiastically" does not sound right - which they rejected? criticised?
• Done As during the district-level conferences, there were certain standouts;" I do not understand standouts. Is it an American expression?
  • Done "As during the district-level conferences, there were certain stood out". This is even more confusing. Dudley Miles (talk) 12:11, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
• Done "the endurance of a mixed economy," I think continuation might be a better word.
• The Congress
• Done "The acknowledging of the importance of these policies" - this is ungrammatical.
• Done Kampuchea - I think adding Cambodia in bracckets would be helpful.
• Done "While the political and economic reports stressed Đổi Mới (Renovation), Vietnam specialist Carlyle Thayer wrote that Võ Văn Kiệt may have been the foremost advocate of this concept." Why the word while? I suggest amending to "The political and economic reports stressed Đổi Mới (Renovation), and Vietnam specialist Carlyle Thayer wrote that Võ Văn Kiệt may have been the foremost advocate of this concept."

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Prose problems set out above.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Yes

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Yes

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Yes

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Yes

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Yes

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• I will put this on hold, but I do not see any major problems apart from the prose queries. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:35, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Amendments so far look OK apart from the one relating to standaout. Dudley Miles (talk) 12:24, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
    • All done except that you were going to look into what was meant by abolition of individual trade. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:55, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
      • @Dudley Miles: Fixed, I think. It was badly explained (at least I think so), if you want to take a closer look at it I can probably send you the pdf. Anyhow, fixed. --TIAYN (talk) 17:21, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
• I have passed it now. Well done. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:13, 8 March 2014 (UTC)